Kentucky

#1
Vollifer1949

Vollifer1949

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
744
Likes
1,017
#1
Basketball is not a blueblood any longer except in the minds of people in Harlan, Somerset and Hazard.
 
#4
#4
Vollifer1949 said:
Basketball is not a blueblood any longer except in the minds of people in Harlan, Somerset and Hazard.
Click to expand...

UK is just an example of how some of the traditional powerhouses struggled to adapt with all the change over the last 10 years. But I'm withholding judgement on our new coach until next year when he gets a full offseason and time to create his ideal roster.
 
#5
#5
Boston Vol said:
They’re the most successful program in the history of the sport. You don’t lose your blue blood status because you go 10 years without a final four appearance.
Click to expand...
Curious how most of the top MBB programs historically have blue as their primary color:
UK, Duke, Carolina, UCLA, Kansas…
 
#7
#7
Vollifer1949 said:
Basketball is not a blueblood any longer except in the minds of people in Harlan, Somerset and Hazard.
Click to expand...
1 - What @Boston Vol said
2 - Blue blood simply means old money, not necessarily "the highest performing program at this moment."

UK is the epitome of a blue blood and probably still would be even if they didn't make a FF for the next 20 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueOrange and Vol in Buckeye Land
#8
#8
05_never_again said:
1 - What @Boston Vol said
2 - Blue blood simply means old money, not necessarily "the highest performing program at this moment."

UK is the epitome of a blue blood and probably still would be even if they didn't make a FF for the next 20 years.
Click to expand...

While I agree, 20 years is a LONG time to go without much success.

We should know that as well as anyone ha ha.

I can easily see a team losing its blue blood status with the combination of sanctions and sustained bad performance. Especially now when news cycles are becoming shorter and shorter

UCLA probably came close honestly. Didn't really hear much about them for about 20-25 ;years.
 
#9
#9
stolitonic said:
While I agree, 20 years is a LONG time to go without much success.

We should know that as well as anyone ha ha.

I can easily see a team losing its blue blood status with the combination of sanctions and sustained bad performance. Especially now when news cycles are becoming shorter and shorter

UCLA probably came close honestly. Didn't really hear much about them for about 20-25 ;years.
Click to expand...
UCLA is also a unique case among the other blue bloods in that the vast majority of their successful years are all clustered together. When you look at UK, UNC, and Kansas, those schools have been more consistent over the decades.

UCLA has won titles in the 60s, 70s, and 90s. Since Wooden, any high level of success they've had has been kind of fleeting and hasn't lasted longer than 2-3 years. Since 2000, they've also missed the NCAAT altogether 7 times. UK has won titles in the 30s, 40s, 50s, 70s, 90s, and 2010s, and has missed just 3 NCAATs. Kansas hasn't missed a NCAAT since the 80s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol in Buckeye Land and stolitonic
#12
#12
Tennessee football hasn't won anything meaningful since 1999 but they are still a blue blood program. Absurd assertion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: igotworms
#13
#13
Imo the big 4 blue bloods in MBB are

Kentucky
North Carolina
Kansas
Indiana
 
#17
#17
I think it’s hard to equate blue blood status in a similar way to college football because there is less of a distinction at the top. There are many programs worth a billion dollars each that have varying level of success over the years.
 
#20
#20
Volinnooga said:
Are we a blue blood in football? We sure wondered around in the desert for longer than 10 years trying to find our way.
Click to expand...
Not when you have not won a conference championship in over a quarter of a century. That would be like saying Georgia Tech or Minnesota were a blue blood.
 
#21
#21
Volinnooga said:
Are we a blue blood in football? We sure wondered around in the desert for longer than 10 years trying to find our way.
Click to expand...
No. Tennessee has always been on the periphery of blue blood status, but the lack of national titles/national relevance over a three decade stretch from the mid 50s-mid 80s hurt the program from a historical perspective.
 
#24
#24
Boston Vol said:
No. Tennessee has always been on the periphery of blue blood status, but the lack of national titles/national relevance over a three decade stretch from the mid 50s-mid 80s hurt the program from a historical perspective.
Click to expand...
We were plenty relevant nationally late 60's and early 70's.
 
#25
#25
EasternVol said:
We were plenty relevant nationally late 60's and early 70's.
Click to expand...
Our big down periods after Neyland were late 50s to early 60s and mid 70s to early 80s. Maybe 6-7 down years for both eras. Not sure if that was enough to kill blue blood borderline status. However there were some great years from mid 60s to mid 70s. What really killed our legacy was Fulmers late years through Heupel’s first year. That 15 year period absolutely destroyed us. Objectively, if I’m honest we are second tier right below the blue bloods
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top